Re: [Gcl-devel] New random tester failures

[Paul F. Dietz]

Camm Maguire wrote:
> Greetings, and thanks for the quick notice!  I had introduced this
> when speeding up certain binary operator function calls of more than
> two arguments via compiler macros.
>
> I think this should be fixed now.  Please confirm, and review if time
> permits.  I am assuming I only need to ensure evaluation of arguments
> which are of type cons and whose car is not 'quote.

This has apparently introduced a new bug:

Test MISC.449 failed
Form: (FUNCALL (COMPILE NIL '(LAMBDA (A) (* 10 A (SETQ A 1000)))) 1)
Expected value: 10000
Actual value: 10000000.

(this test has been committed.)

        Paul